Re: [tcpm] Re: [e2e] cwnd update correction for congestion avoidance

[Kacheong Poon]

Ted Faber wrote:

> Sure, but you mentioned that failure mode, and it's easy enough to
> correct that mode.


I guess your point is that some people fix an issue
without looking at the bigger picture.  My point was that
since there was an issue, one might as well do a better
job than a point patch.  Since I think network stack
implementors normally should do a better job, I inferred
that the issue being discussed should not be there in
practice.  Well, I guess you are trying to prove me wrong
that some stack implementors are not that good anyway.
Point taken (-:


--

                                                K. Poon.
                                                kacheong.poon@xxxxxxx


_______________________________________________
tcpm mailing list
tcpm@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpm